Lily Wuerth will be live on our Instagram page today at 3pm ET to talk about how she used extracurriculars to get into Georgia Tech. ASK HER ANYTHING!
GUEST STUDENT OF THE WEEK: Rohan is a freshman at Dartmouth (and loves it) having gotten in ED for the Class of 2023. He's here to debunk myths regarding admissions and student life at his school. ASK HIM ANYTHING!
Make sure to check out our May Checklists for HS Juniors and HS Seniors. Consult these quick resources to get you started on the process this month.
As we work to adjust to the current reality, make sure to check out these dedicated COVID-19 resources: our directory of virtual campus tours, our directory of extended deadlines, as well as the list of schools going test optional this fall.
Perfect SAT and ACT scores
hnedmuqin
2 replies1 threads New Member
Hi, this is my first post here. My daughter got a perfect score, 2400, on her SAT and a perfect score, 36, on her ACT.
She is a junior. She took her first SAT on January 28 and her first SAT on Feburary 11. Both are her first try and she did not take any test preparation classes.
I am really happy for her. Her friends and schoolmates are not at all surprised and said the perfect scores were expected. I am writing here to show off a bit. I guess I am not very modest today. My daughter is smart and loves science very much.
On the other hand, I worry a lot about paying for those expensive private schools that she likes, as those only offer need-based aid, not merit scholarship. The middle class families seem to be out of luck for getting financial aid, not poor enough to go to school for free or rich enough to pay over $200,000 cash for four years of education.
23 repliesShe is a junior. She took her first SAT on January 28 and her first SAT on Feburary 11. Both are her first try and she did not take any test preparation classes.
I am really happy for her. Her friends and schoolmates are not at all surprised and said the perfect scores were expected. I am writing here to show off a bit. I guess I am not very modest today. My daughter is smart and loves science very much.
On the other hand, I worry a lot about paying for those expensive private schools that she likes, as those only offer need-based aid, not merit scholarship. The middle class families seem to be out of luck for getting financial aid, not poor enough to go to school for free or rich enough to pay over $200,000 cash for four years of education.
Post edited by hnedmuqin on
This discussion has been closed.
Replies to: Perfect SAT and ACT scores
You know, I thought this was true when I first started searching, but now I think it's probably better to have more money in nearly all situations (applicable only to paying for college, of course).
We did some searching for private merit scholarships, and most of them require qualities such as having exceptionally strong "leadership". She is in the National Honor Society, but to qualify for those private scholarship, she has to be an exceptional leader in community services, etc. What is wrong with not wanting to be a strong leader? To make a society work, there have to be leaders and many many non-leaders. Why are most of the merit scholarship gear towards leaders? How many great scientists are community service leaders? What is wrong with being a good leader of yourself, i.e. be a good student, do a good job as a student?
It's important to note, however, that this combination will not significantly improve her chances in college admissions over having a single perfect score, which in turn does not yield much benefit over a near-perfect score.
As in highly selective college admissions, it is important in almost all merit scholarship considerations to have extracurricular experience that demonstrates an applicant's capacity to contribute to campus and thereafter to leverage his or her education for society. In order to make an impact, a strong degree of initiative and the ability to work well in a team or better yet lead it (even research scientists have to interact in teams, lead others, and persuade their colleagues) are important. Extracurriculars that support an applicant's possession of those skills are thus helpful; being a leader of some sort in high school is a good way to do this.
I don't know of any major scholarship programs that award grants on the sole basis of one's scores, except for perhaps some public universities' objective scholarship scaling programs. If an applicant has only great scores and grades and hopes to get into a very top university or earn a full-ride to a highly ranked school, he or she must be a truly extraordinary academic (in math, for instance, an IMO or at least MOSP qualifier) to get in on that merit alone.
Best of luck to your daughter. Whether or not she is able to get into and comfortably afford the college of her choice, I'm sure she has the talent and drive to succeed in her chosen field regardless of the undergraduate institution she attends.
She should have little trouble getting accepted to any tech/engineering college in the country. Now, whether they'd shower merit money on her is anyones' guess.
Without major awards or a strong research background, Caltech must be considered an exception to your claim -- in addition to MIT of course, because its admissions practices are holistic in the manner of other highly competitive schools, like HYPS.
This is the age where students must learn the existing knowledge. Those who can learn what already exists have a much better chance to innovate later on. Those who don't really understand fundamental science - may do google research and create a innovative project - but likely never be able to reach the frontiers of innovation that will turn into anything useful.
If you see China and India - these countries are extremely merit based and have been producing better results than the US. Also if you see scientific temperament in US till 1980s it has largely been merit based. Since then, Managers (those who are not doers) have brought in Leadership to justify there own ascent on the value chain.
A lot of Leadership at the age of 15-17 is meaningless as the children have not reached that level of maturity where they understand themselves and the science they are dealing with. Just a lot of drive and passion to do something good is a virtue but it is lot easily done than to work hard at studies and score perfect marks or to be a leader in real life situation (which requires a lot of grit and inner strength).
Also good leaders, in the past have usually come out of the underprivileged lot - because the hardships had such a profound impact on them. One has to go through a lot of perseverance that makes someone a leader. These days there are businesses that will send you to a charity mission in Africa, charge big bucks for it and it will shop on your resume. It is easy to start a club at school than to go in slums in underdeveloped countries and live there and help out). What is really lacking is that most high schoolers are into Leadership because they need it for college application.
Also note that merely having good leaders is not sufficient. You also need good followers and their goodness can only come from the sincerity of the leaders.
If universities truly want to reward the Leaders they must go through their contribution and intent with a lens in their hands and a rare few would be selected. I would agree if some such demonstrated leadership was give a little weight in the application among other personality traits.
On the other hand, those students who have worked hard upon themselves and persevered do actually have the potential to one day inspire others to follow them.
Vinsim, your argument is a classic Idealism v. Realism conflict. If the US followed China and India's examples, the rich would be favored far more by the education system, as demonstrated in both Asian countries. Granted, merit has benefits by only looking at the information you can regurgitate. Though a poor student in a solely merit-based system can study hard enough and receive high scores (thus standing a fighting chance), these students face many obstacles which the rich easily bypass. Furthermore, merit systems inhibit diversity because students spend grueling hours to try and score a tad better than the next person who may be studying just as hard if not harder. Having Chinese cousins who live this everyday, I know for a fact that the merit system is also very punishing. If you perform poorly on an entrance exam, the odds against your success later in life exponentially increase. In comparison, the American system adds some buffering through the push for extracurriculars, having understood that not everyone is a study-bot. And that students can reveal their strengths through other methods. In addition, you excessively slander the image of leadership with that example of the African trip. Most students actually show leadership by taking on roles such as tutors, camp counselors, captains, presidents/vp/secretary/treasurer, and other methods. In most cases, students work hard to achieve their leadership roles and handle them well. The follower concept is true but continued membership in a club/activity usually shows sufficient abilities to follow. The rest of that statement just lost me. Anyways, I will not try and assert that the American system is flawless, but it definitely is a good alternative to the merit system. Paper tests are not everything at any age and will never be. The important things are what you actually retain and actually apply to situations beyond the classroom and test question 6C.
As a side note: your comment about pointless research miffed me. I actually go to a professional lab to help out with real experiments and to conduct my own. What's wrong with that? I learn valuable information when I'm there, and I can practice applying concepts from the various science classes I have taken in high school to a real environment.